The heart of the matter? The Mayor's nominations to various boards and commissions.
Blanco was clearly not happy on Monday evening when the Mayor delivered a sheaf of nominations to the Council that very night. Which meant without being on the agenda, with no previous public notice, and with no notice to the Councilors. He made it clear Monday that the nominations would be allowed on Wednesday's agenda only providing Councilors received complete details in their Tuesday packets.
That evidently did not happen and led to last night's rough justice.
Delayed in getting to the meeting at its start, President Blanco arrived about 45 minutes on. Upon assuming the chair and asking Councilor Carter where they were in the agenda, she explained that one of the nominations was being withdrawn.
Asking a few questions of the Clerk about the nominations -- at least one was not accompanied by a resumé and PT noticed that another had no street address listed and a third had a work address listed -- President Blanco declared all of the nominations summarily removed from the agenda "on the authority of the Council president."
[PT is not sure Council President had the parliamentary authority to do so, but he certainly had the MORAL authority -- and it was certainly clear no one would intervene.]
Declaring that he would not have the Council disrespected in this manner and that he would "not be subjected to political pressure," Blanco continued to tongue lash the administration for several minutes, ending with "Do I need to repeat myself in Spanish...or French..or Russian?...because I can..."
When asked to explain the Administration's failure to live up to what was agreed on Monday, city administrator Carlton McGee began answering without the mike. When someone in the audience protested, he pulled the mike over but mumbled so badly the audience could not hear very much of his response to Blanco.
When the Mayor asked to speak, she was given the floor. After she finished, Blanco insisted that no nominations would be allowed to come before the Council in future if the nominees had not met with the Council in executive session prior. And he suggested to the Mayor that if a simple resumé could not or would not be provided by the nominee, that she should consider not nominating that person.
WHAT IS GOING ON HERE?
When employed by the City, one of my responsibilities had been to assist in the recruitment and vetting of nominees for boards and commissions. Among the questions I had to address were: ensuring candidates were broadly representative of the community (gender, Ward of residency, diversity), that they had expertise if needed, that they understood the duties and would commit the time -- including training, if required, and an exploration of potential areas of conflict of interest. Lastly -- or firstly -- it was made clear to every potential appointee that a brief resumé was de rigeur, as well as a brief cover letter addressed to the Mayor giving contact information and naming the seat in which the candidate was interested.
I sympathize completely with the Mayor and the Council in how difficult it is to find and recruit suitable candidates. But the public's interest deserves the best effort.
So, when all that is said and done, why should the actual presentation of nominations to the Council be so problematic?
Unless it is simply a sign of the chaotic, ad hoc, and unplanned manner in which an Administration conducts its business?
We'll have another three and a half years to see if this is the case here, but an outline is beginning to emerge.
-- Dan Damon
Not getting your own CLIPPINGS email daily? Click here to get started.
*
No comments:
Post a Comment